The problem is the often MASSIVE air quotes that can be (but not always) found around the "willingly allow" part when it comes to allowing the US to set up troops in their country if you look past the surface.
We're not talking Iraq or Saudi Arabia, we're talking Poland... No need for airquotes there.
Go look at *any* semi-decent poll, it has more support than any living politician by a big margin.
You can just as easily flip your entire second and third sentences around because it's just as fitting for what NATO and its puppet masters do as they push their ideological bullshit in their wake. Once NATO sets up shop it becomes exponentially harder for opposition to said ideologies to resist. Though that resistance don't get anywhere near enough support for NATO to need to put them down with weapons. But then why would they? 'Control the Media, Control the Mind' and all that.
WTF does NATO have to do with ideology? Do you perhaps mistake NATO for the EU or other, even more ideological organization? These are different organizations. If NATO is an ideological organization, how the hell are Turkey, Hungary and Germany doing the stuff they are doing?
Even if one is to accept the claim that this is all just Russia looking for an excuse to go the Soviet Union with less communism, it doesn't excuse those who use created and use NATO's mission creep (not to mention the EU) to create a version of the Austria-Hungry that's just as godless and destructive as the actual Soviet Union. If not worse in its own unique ways.
History 101 reminder - Russia was an empire and not exactly a nice one before it turned into Soviet Union. To us in the region it's not such a huge surprise that it would head back into similar direction.
It's all a bunch of power plays and hypocrisy from the West and the East. With everyone going 'it's okay when WE do it!'. The truth of the matter is that this stupidity will just continue to grind down the West (which includes Russia) and allow the WEF and the EU to continue their anti-European crusade by leaving countries destitute and depopulation thanks to war and ideological bullshit that results in fewer people having families and children.
What does the one have to do with the other? The existence of new ideological bullshit from western leftists in no way justifies ignoring the old ideological bullshit coming from the islamists, or chicoms, or the likes of Russia, they are merely exploiting the weaknesses fostered by the former.
For all i care, i'll celebrate if they all burn in atomic fire.
I completely fail to understand what i see as the beginnings of infection with outright hippie-pacifist style useful idiot vision of the world spreading to the right, manifesting in promotion of neutrality if not sympathy towards external enemies just on account of existence of internal ones.
Or do you think it's a coincidence that the WEF-adjacent Blackrock has gotten its claws in to help Ukraine rebuild?
So? The West is supposed to stop doing anything at all as long as Blackrock exists and is allowed to make any business?
What do you propose as an actually serious solution here, other than being demoralized and dogmatically contrarian for the hell of it?
@Bacle See above. And I would say that you're just being fooled into yet another money-laundering forever war that does nothing but weakens the West.
How does bringing ruin upon external enemies of the West weaken the West?
The only problem with that is that it doesn't happen more often.
But that you support because it has the Cold War enemy of Russia and because it's being done in the name of 'liberty' and 'freedom' and 'the rights of small nations'.
Yes, i very much want my "small nation" to have rights, just like other "small nation" of Ukraine.
If you want to become Russian serf, pretty sure their immigration services will welcome you, with a draft card even.
The same old tricks and half-truths that have been rolled out since WW1. And in the exception of WW2, where largely just that; not that it matters, given that Europe swapped life under the Nazis for life under the Soviet Union. Which was only less genocidal because Stalin died before he could kick off his purges and because there were a lot fewer rich people when compared to the Poles, Slavs, and everyone else Hitler would have slaughtered.
Which makes you trying to excuse the revanchist post-Soviet rule of the ex-KGB colonel even more puzzling.
Why aren't you for full decommunization of Russia then?
He's doing nothing more than the mess he and others helped to create before the Soviet Union crashed to rebuild a similar thing under a different, older banner.
Russia was never even interested in making a proper divorce with the communist past, so that it takes naive people like you to imagine it happened.
Fun question: When did WW2 begin, and what answer to that question would you get if you were a student in a Russian public school?
